Residents raise questions about wind energy

Published 8:00 pm, Wednesday, July 13, 2005

UBLY  About 150 people gathered at an informational meeting Wednesday night at Ubly Heights Golf & Country Club to discuss wind energy facilities in Huron County.

A proposed ordinance amending the county's master plan to accommodate agricultural land preservation and alternative energy resources was defeated during Tuesday's meeting of the Huron County Board of Commissioners. The measure now will go back to the county's planning commission for tweaking before being resubmitted to the county board.

Dan Guza, who organized the meeting and provided handouts and information to those in attendance, said he hoped the meeting would address some of the concerns community members have with the proposed facilities.

"The reason we're here tonight is to address some of the issues that haven't been talked about in the community," Guza said. "We've seen a lot of positives, but there are negatives, too."

Guza showed the audience roughly 45 minutes of video shot by residents near wind farms in Pennsylvania and New York. The first video, from Pennsylvania, featured five or six people who were unhappy with the wind turbines in their area.

The people in that video described the noise from the turbines as a "constant whooshing", and compared it to a heavy wind coming over the nearby mountain. Others complained about the flickering of light during certain times of day, and the changes the wind towers caused to the views from their homes.

Wind energy companies considering Huron County have said the wind turbines produce noise equal to about 50 decibels, and that flickering is a problem only for a few minutes at a time early in the morning and in the evening.

Guza said these issues are relevant to the Huron County projects, as different wind energy companies have told him they have earmarked money to pay for awnings over windows and other measures to offset these problems if homeowners complain.

Part of the problem for people within the proposed overlay district, Guza said, is they aren't clear regarding how the standards built into the wind energy/agricultural land preservation ordinance will be enforced. He encouraged the audience to call their commissioners with their questions and concerns.

"They don't want to put any teeth in the ordinance, and I'm not sure why," Guza said. "They said it will be the job of the prosecutor to enforce the ordinance."

Wind energy representatives disagree, of course, and have said during meetings they feel the ordinance is stronger than they would like to see in some areas, but overall called it fair.

Guza said many people also have questions regarding the tax benefits the wind energy companies could receive for bringing the turbines into the county.

"I don't think anybody can quantify the property tax since it doesn't go into effect until the towers are certified," he said. "My understanding is wind energy companies prefer to stay tax exempt."

Planning commission members have said the tax issue is one to be resolved between the developers, the townships and the local school boards.

The proposed zoning amendment would require the turbines to be setback 1,000 feet from inhabited dwellings  including buildings such as homes, schools and churches. Some present at Wednesday night's meeting wondered if that was far enough. Planning commission members said that number was decided upon after looking at model ordinances from around the country.

"If you're uncomfortable with a turbine 1,000 feet from your house, then you should let these guys know," Guza told the audience.

Guza also said he would like to see the overlay district tested for stray voltage as a benchmark, so if wind turbines do go up the community will be able to tell if they have increased the stray voltage in the area.

He said through talking to people in other communities around the country with wind farms, he feels the facilities often are pushed through the community quickly, before people have a chance to ask questions.

Guza said he was approached with contracts by several of the wind energy companies looking at Huron County, but he was uneasy with language in the contract requiring the landowner not to say anything negative about the project.

One community member in the audience pointed out that she wouldn't be offered a contract and would not benefit directly from the presence of the turbines, but was frustrated she would have to look at them anyway.

Another asked for an impartial impact study to be done to determine the positives and negatives of the project.

Guza called the project a "tax shelter" for the wind energy companies and said he didn't feel the turbines are in the best interest of the community. He said the only way the community can protect itself is through zoning, and he applauded Huron County Commissioners Don Booms, Ron Wruble and Mike Gage for voting against the amendment until each could get some of their questions answered. All three are on the record saying they want to see the turbines operate in Huron County, but each also wanted to slow the project down for a couple of weeks in order to gather more information.

Many people expressed concern that property owners whose land adjoins land with a windmill won't have any say in how close the turbine is to their property. Some said undeveloped property  property purchased by people with the intent of someday building a house on it  is not protected well enough under the proposed ordinance.

Other issues Guza listed included decommissioning plans for towers that will no longer be used, effects on property value for surrounding landowners, effects on quality of life, hidden costs and the potential for wind energy companies here now to sell the project down the road to other companies who won't be friendly to the community.

The planning commission will meet sometime before Aug. 3 to address board of commissioner concerns regarding the proposed amendment. The amendment will then be sent back to the board for another vote. Commissioners said they hope to see the item on the agenda for their next meeting on July 26.